Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » DSP cards
DSP cards [message #75968] |
Tue, 14 November 2006 07:29 |
gene lennon
Messages: 565 Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I have been watching the Pulsar threads with great interest. I am also checking
out Fairlight.
A third interesting DSP based option is Soundscape. SSL recently purchased
the company and they have a Pulsar-like PCI/DSP/Mixer solution.
Anyone want to bet that this sounds bad?
http://www.sydec.be/Press/PressRelease/Article/ID/e6f7b4cf-4 759-4811-bd27-eeb92b6b3800/
Algorithmix software running on Soundscape hardware. If this is based on
Algorithmix Blue, it should set a very high standard.
Gene
|
|
|
|
|
Re: DSP cards [message #75977 is a reply to message #75974] |
Tue, 14 November 2006 10:19 |
DJ
Messages: 1124 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'm hoping that the Creamware mixer will provide the same mojo. What I
notice about the two computer thing when using Paris is that as long as I'm
doing my panning in Paris, I can set the Paris faders to unity and use the
Cubase fader automation. I notice no sonic impact at all and I've got the
added advantage of being able to fine tune the mix using additional fader
automation in Paris if need be. There's something about the way you can
crowd that 32 bit float architecture in Cubase and then send that stuff over
lightpipe into Paris that really allows the best features of both platforms.
Hopefully, a similar sonic situation can be achieved with the Creamware
mixer. I'm certainly going to give it a try.
If it doesn't float my boat, I'm so accustomed to mixing on two DAWs now
that I figure I can put up with it a while longer if I can achieve
stability. The shipment from Germany cleared customs yesterday so both our
cards should be arriving this week. I'm having mine shipped 2nd day air so
the card and A16U will be here tomorrow. Once all this stuff is patched in
and routed so that Pulsar ADAT and Paris ADAT are interconnected, I'll know
if the stability issue is truly what I'm hoping it will be. As I have said
before, on *my* rig, the Pulsar cards are more stable than the RME so far,
with two cards....and this is likely due to a simpler clocking scenario.
Deej
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:4559ee13$1@linux...
>
> Yep, that would be great... the whole two-computer thing is not
> to my liking, really. I'm going to try a few more summing
> experiments with Paris, but I'd rather have a single in-one-box
> solutioon... hopefully Pulsar will be it in my case.
>
> Neil
>
>
> Chas. Duncan <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote:
> >
> >Interesting. Integration with a small format SSL style console would
> >conceivably put this thing in a world of its own. What I want (if I
> >go for any kind of upgrade in the next year) is a set-up that will
> >just sit there and cook like a stove for the next five years. Music
> >in, music out, hit the switch and go. Kind of like Paris, only of the
> >21st century...
> >
> >chas.
> >
> >
> >On 15 Nov 2006 01:29:13 +1000, "Gene Lennon"
> ><glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>I have been watching the Pulsar threads with great interest. I am also
> checking
> >>out Fairlight.
> >>A third interesting DSP based option is Soundscape. SSL recently
purchased
> >>the company and they have a Pulsar-like PCI/DSP/Mixer solution.
> >>
> >>Anyone want to bet that this sounds bad?
>
>> http://www.sydec.be/Press/PressRelease/Article/ID/e6f7b4cf-4 759-4811-bd27-
eeb92b6b3800/
> >>
> >>Algorithmix software running on Soundscape hardware. If this is based on
> >>Algorithmix Blue, it should set a very high standard.
> >>
> >>Gene
> >
>
|
|
|
|
|
Re: DSP cards [message #75985 is a reply to message #75978] |
Tue, 14 November 2006 11:18 |
DJ
Messages: 1124 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gene,
What I have in mind to do is take 40 track mix I've got here and do the
following:
NO FX:
1. Levels, panning and summing in Cubase native
2. Levels and panning in Cubase, summing in Scope with Scope mixer faders
set to unity.
3. Levels, panning and summing in Scope
4. Levels in Cubase, panning and summing in Paris with Paris faders set to
unity.
I don't expect there to be *huge* differences but if there are.then that's a
good thing..
Then I'm going to trick out these mixes a bit with some of the tools I have
available here, using whatever functionalities each platform/mix scenario
provides. I think the big difference happens when various processors are
applied because that's where the rubber meets the road as far as the summing
bus capabilities are concerned.
Deej
"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSP.com> wrote in message news:455a090a$1@linux...
>
> "DJ" <nowayjose@dude.net> wrote:
> >I'm hoping that the Creamware mixer will provide the same mojo. What I
> >notice about the two computer thing when using Paris is that as long as
> I'm
> >doing my panning in Paris, I can set the Paris faders to unity and use
the
> >Cubase fader automation. I notice no sonic impact at all and I've got the
> >added advantage of being able to fine tune the mix using additional fader
> >automation in Paris if need be. There's something about the way you can
> >crowd that 32 bit float architecture in Cubase and then send that stuff
> over
> >lightpipe into Paris that really allows the best features of both
platforms.
> >Hopefully, a similar sonic situation can be achieved with the Creamware
> >mixer. I'm certainly going to give it a try.
> >
> >If it doesn't float my boat, I'm so accustomed to mixing on two DAWs now
> >that I figure I can put up with it a while longer if I can achieve
> >stability. The shipment from Germany cleared customs yesterday so both
our
> >cards should be arriving this week. I'm having mine shipped 2nd day air
> so
> >the card and A16U will be here tomorrow. Once all this stuff is patched
> in
> >and routed so that Pulsar ADAT and Paris ADAT are interconnected, I'll
know
> >if the stability issue is truly what I'm hoping it will be. As I have
said
> >before, on *my* rig, the Pulsar cards are more stable than the RME so
far,
> >with two cards....and this is likely due to a simpler clocking scenario.
> >
> >Deej
>
> I am anxious to see how this works out and more importantly, how it
sounds.
> I hope Amy is up for some critical listening tests :-)
> Gene
>
|
|
|
Re: DSP cards [message #76002 is a reply to message #75980] |
Tue, 14 November 2006 20:02 |
duncan
Messages: 123 Registered: November 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
LaMont --
I have to agree with you about their interface -- really stiff and
unappealing. Lots of boxes, letters, numbers -- looks too much like
some kind of tax form, wouldn't be able to take it myself...
-- and Paris has always been so easy on the eyes...
Agree with you about dedicated DSP too -- just seems obvious. Maybe
one of these days some company will get all of this together. Could
have been Ensoniq/ID -- seven years ago...
On we go -- chas.
On 15 Nov 2006 05:39:10 +1000, "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>Gene, I was just looking that the Soundscape stuff and have emailed them with
>specific questions mostlly about their editing mixing software. That being
>said, I think that their interface looks antequated. However, thier DSP cards
>and hardware looks great.
>
>See, I'm of the school that dedicated DSP is the tickect to both,low latency
>tracking and mixing, superior fx. I love Paris and I love PT(HD). I love
>Nuendo.. So many Nuendo users want a dedicated DSP solution. But, teh Naitive
>folks have good reasoning as well..
>
>
>"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>I have been watching the Pulsar threads with great interest. I am also checking
>>out Fairlight.
>>A third interesting DSP based option is Soundscape. SSL recently purchased
>>the company and they have a Pulsar-like PCI/DSP/Mixer solution.
>>
>>Anyone want to bet that this sounds bad?
>> http://www.sydec.be/Press/PressRelease/Article/ID/e6f7b4cf-4 759-4811-bd27-eeb92b6b3800/
>>
>>Algorithmix software running on Soundscape hardware. If this is based on
>>Algorithmix Blue, it should set a very high standard.
>>
>>Gene
>>
|
|
|
Re: DSP cards [message #76011 is a reply to message #76002] |
Wed, 15 November 2006 07:06 |
DJ
Messages: 1124 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I've got a buddy with a big Soundscape system. He uses RME converters and
sums through a TAC Matchless console.
"Chas. Duncan" <duncan5199ATsbcglobalDOTnet@> wrote in message
news:3n3ll254ub5nb9g69oqgdpmh3t79p2c066@4ax.com...
>
> LaMont --
>
> I have to agree with you about their interface -- really stiff and
> unappealing. Lots of boxes, letters, numbers -- looks too much like
> some kind of tax form, wouldn't be able to take it myself...
>
> -- and Paris has always been so easy on the eyes...
>
> Agree with you about dedicated DSP too -- just seems obvious. Maybe
> one of these days some company will get all of this together. Could
> have been Ensoniq/ID -- seven years ago...
>
> On we go -- chas.
>
>
>
> On 15 Nov 2006 05:39:10 +1000, "LaMont" <jjdpro@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Gene, I was just looking that the Soundscape stuff and have emailed them
with
> >specific questions mostlly about their editing mixing software. That
being
> >said, I think that their interface looks antequated. However, thier DSP
cards
> >and hardware looks great.
> >
> >See, I'm of the school that dedicated DSP is the tickect to both,low
latency
> >tracking and mixing, superior fx. I love Paris and I love PT(HD). I love
> >Nuendo.. So many Nuendo users want a dedicated DSP solution. But, teh
Naitive
> >folks have good reasoning as well..
> >
> >
> >"Gene Lennon" <glennon@NOSPmyrealbox.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>I have been watching the Pulsar threads with great interest. I am also
checking
> >>out Fairlight.
> >>A third interesting DSP based option is Soundscape. SSL recently
purchased
> >>the company and they have a Pulsar-like PCI/DSP/Mixer solution.
> >>
> >>Anyone want to bet that this sounds bad?
>
>> http://www.sydec.be/Press/PressRelease/Article/ID/e6f7b4cf-4 759-4811-bd27-
eeb92b6b3800/
> >>
> >>Algorithmix software running on Soundscape hardware. If this is based on
> >>Algorithmix Blue, it should set a very high standard.
> >>
> >>Gene
> >>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 02 21:09:52 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04801 seconds
|